curator-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jordan Zimmerman <jor...@jordanzimmerman.com>
Subject Re: Fix for CURATOR-42
Date Wed, 30 Jul 2014 00:31:20 GMT
http://www.quora.com/What-is-semantic-versioning

Please, enlighten the world :)

-Jordan

From: Jordan Zimmerman <jordan@jordanzimmerman.com>
Reply: Jordan Zimmerman <jordan@jordanzimmerman.com>>
Date: July 29, 2014 at 7:17:43 PM
To: dev@curator.apache.org <dev@curator.apache.org>>, Eric Tschetter <echeddar@gmail.com>>
Cc: Cameron McKenzie <mckenzie.cam@gmail.com>>
Subject:  Re: Fix for CURATOR-42  

Actually, that helps a lot. It’s the best explanation I’ve read. Given that, it’s correct
to move to 2.7.0 because of the CuratorFrameworkFactory change.

It’s so good, you should post that somewhere. Quora maybe?

-JZ

From: Eric Tschetter <echeddar@gmail.com>
Reply: dev@curator.apache.org <dev@curator.apache.org>>
Date: July 29, 2014 at 6:43:57 PM
To: dev@curator.apache.org <dev@curator.apache.org>>
Cc: Cameron McKenzie <mckenzie.cam@gmail.com>>
Subject:  Re: Fix for CURATOR-42

Jordan, quick semantic versioning tutorial:

If you have 1.0.0 and 1.0.1, you can use either one and you will not
run into errors due to API conflicts (i.e. no ClassNotFound or
NoSuchMethod type exceptions)

If you have 1.0.0 and 1.1.0, you can replace 1.0.0 with 1.1.0 and you
will not have errors due to API conflicts. If you try to swap 1.0.0
in place of something that depends on 1.1.0, however, you *might* have
errors due to API conflicts. I.e. you can go forward without errors,
but not backwards

If you have 1.0.0 and 2.0.0, you will likely have errors due to API
conflicts if you replace either one with the other.

Hope that helps, if not, feel free to completely ignore me :)

--Eric

On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 5:18 PM, Jordan Zimmerman
<jordan@jordanzimmerman.com> wrote:
> Though, the api change is backward compatible. Frankly, semantic versioning confuses
me most of the time.
>
> -JZ
>
> From: Cameron McKenzie <mckenzie.cam@gmail.com>
> Reply: Cameron McKenzie <mckenzie.cam@gmail.com>>
> Date: July 29, 2014 at 5:15:49 PM
> To: Jordan Zimmerman <jordan@jordanzimmerman.com>>
> Cc: dev@curator.apache.org <dev@curator.apache.org>>
> Subject: Re: Fix for CURATOR-42
>
> Ok, thanks. Also, have we decided against doing a 2.6.1? I noticed that this version
is gone and only 2.7.0 is available.
> cheers
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 8:14 AM, Jordan Zimmerman <jordan@jordanzimmerman.com>
wrote:
> Next time just create a PR - I made one. Looks good to me.
>
> -JZ
>
> From: Cameron McKenzie <cammckenzie@apache.org>
> Reply: dev@curator.apache.org <dev@curator.apache.org>>, cammckenzie@apache.org
<cammckenzie@apache.org>>
> Date: July 29, 2014 at 5:09:56 PM
> To: dev@curator.apache.org <dev@curator.apache.org>>
> Subject: Fix for CURATOR-42
>
> I've just committed a fix for CURATOR-42. Can someone give it a review
> please?
> cheers
> Cam
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message